The Strange Similarities Between Larry Millete & Bryan Kohberger

Prosecutors are successfully able to obtain convictions against the accused in murder trails 76-80% of the time, even when there is no body to prove a murder even took place. Idaho prosecutor, Bill Thompson, did it in 2014 and now a new prosecutor in California seeks to convict Larry Millete of the murder of his wife Maya without proof she is even dead. In this video, I take a detailed look at the some of the surprising similarities between the murder prosecution of Larry Millete and some similar connections to the prosecution of Bryan Kohberger in the Idaho 4 murders. I examine how prosecutors built the Millete case largely through circumstantial evidence, digital evidence, behavioral evidence, and cell phone data—elements that many viewers will immediately recognize from the case against Bryan Kohberger. Topics discussed include: • Bill Thompson's conviction of a murder case in 2014 without a body • The use of cell phone tower and location data • Circumstantial evidence versus direct evidence • A judges refusal to allow alternative suspects into trial • Law enforcement being accused of being narrow sighted and not investigating other suspects While the facts of these cases are very different, the prosecution theories contain several striking parallels that deserve closer examination. Join me as we break down the evidence, compare the cases side-by-side, and explore some of the difference and similarities in this interesting case of no-body murder trial. As always, remember that every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.